Buy a house during the New deal issued buyer v.

"We pay the first payment is borrowed, after the new deal, the loan does not come down, is really no money to pay the rest of the purchase." Yesterday afternoon, Ms. Zhou, a house buyer, was in the West Side court with a sale. During the trial, Ms. Zhou repeatedly said she was due to the city's real estate policy and could not afford to buy a house.　　The defendant, Mr. Ma, insisted that Ms. Zhou continue to fulfill the purchase contract. Event Playback: A deposit after the new deal issued by the plaintiff Ms. Zhou, April 8, 2010, she and the defendant, Mr. Ma signed the "Beijing Stock house sale and purchase contract", bought Mr. Ma located in the Xicheng District Real Zhen Wu Miao near a set of houses. Ms. Zhou successively to Shuma a deposit of 20,000 yuan and the first payment of 580,000 yuan. Unexpectedly, in the process of fulfilling the contract, Beijing's mortgage policy has undergone new changes. May 5, 2010, Ms. Zhou got intermediary and guarantee company's notice, learned that their purchase of the third housing in accordance with the new deal can not obtain the Construction Bank Housing Provident Fund loans. Ms. Zhou could not continue with the contract.　　At this time, Mr. Ma has used Ms. Zhou's first payment on the housing involved to learn to bet, and has been the Bank Mortgage property card, no longer pay interest on loans. In order to look back on the payment and deposit, Ms. Zhou repeatedly urged Mr. Ma, but Mr. Ma did not pay.　　Ms. Zhou then sued Mr. Ma to the West Side court and asked the court to decree the two parties to cancel the sale and purchase contract, asking the defendant to return the purchase deposit and the first payment amounted to 600,000 yuan and interest. Around 14 o'clock yesterday, the plaintiff and the defendant Mrs. Ma husband and wife were rushed to court to participate in the lawsuit.　　During the debate, the two sides debated whether the new deal was a force majeure, the applicability of the principle of change of circumstances and whether or not the house sale and purchase contract could continue to be carried out.　　Whether the new deal in court is a force majeure? In the trial, Ms. Zhou said that after signing a housing deal with Mr. Ma, the city's mortgage policy changed, which she could not predict, because the loan could not be done, she and her family could not afford the housing involved.　　Ms. Zhou believes that, leading to her inability to continue to fulfill the purchase contract, is the introduction of New Deal, is a force majeure, rather than her personal reasons, should be applicable to the law of the situation change principle, the dissolution of the two sides of the house sale and purchase contract.　　The defendant, Mr. Ma, retorted that since 2007, the city's housing policy has been changing, the beginning of this year, the media predicted that the government will intervene in the property market, so the city issued a new deal, is not unpredictable, mortgage policy changes should not be caused by the contract can not be fulfilled, if the termination of the contract, will undermine the security of the transaction　　Can the court focus on the contract of sale continue to fulfill? Mr. Ma said the changes in the mortgage policy only led to changes in the way the plaintiff bought the house, not to the other party. "Ms. Zhou's family already has two suites, she can sell a set of rooms, or mortgage a room, to pay the rest of the purchase money."　　Mr. Ma suggested. Ms. Zhou V. "Bitter" said that her family has two suites by both parents in residence, can not sell or mortgage, "weThe purchase of the third suite is for the children of a good school, we pay the first payment is borrowed, now loans do not come down, is really no money to pay the rest of the purchase. "The court did not pronounce the verdict.